Link to post

Share on other sites

questionmark 11,352

That is so, but if nut-jobs are going to use Google Earth to proove their fantasy camps exist, then at least there should be something on Google Earth where they say it is.

Ah, I see. In any case, anybody who has actually bothered to read 1031 will notice that they needs lots of fantasy to convert that text into "Battlefield USA".or why would they say that it seez things like:

Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force

The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States

Besides that, it could be possible that there would be (and have been) hostile foreign forces on US soil to be detained, are we going to let 'em all scream for a lawyer before putting them up in military prison?

Nor have they bothered to read 1032: that seez:

3 SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF

WAR.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.

—The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS

AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

In conclusion, this is either a cheap attempt to create hysteria or we have the demonstration that some people of the ACLU are either incapable or unwilling to read.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

WoIverine 1,461

Ah, I see. In any case, anybody who has actually bothered to read 1031 will notice that they needs lots of fantasy to convert that text into "Battlefield USA".or why would they say that it seez things like:

Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force

The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States

Besides that, it could be possible that there would be (and have been) hostile foreign forces on US soil to be detained, are we going to let 'em all scream for a lawyer before putting them up in military prison?

Nor have they bothered to read 1032: that seez:

3 SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF

WAR.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.

—The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS

AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

In conclusion, this is either a cheap attempt to create hysteria or we have the demonstration that some people of the ACLU are either incapable or unwilling to read.

It "does not extend to", but "can it extend to", on a whim? I see no language that strongly prohibits that eventuality at all, that is what the chaos is about. If it truly "does not extend to" then they should have no qualms about adding further language to clearly state that fact. If they are unwilling to do so, that will reveal the truth of their intentions, common sense will dictate the rest.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

WoIverine 1,461

It "does not extend to", but "can it extend to", on a whim? I see no language that strongly prohibits that eventuality at all, that is what the chaos is about. If it truly "does not extend to" then they should have no qualms about adding further language to clearly state that fact. If they are unwilling to do so, that will reveal the truth of their intentions, common sense will dictate the rest.

How about, "will never extend to"? I'd be ok with that. It's a two word change, and clearly states what the deal is.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

DieChecker 16,419

It "does not extend to", but "can it extend to", on a whim? I see no language that strongly prohibits that eventuality at all, that is what the chaos is about. If it truly "does not extend to" then they should have no qualms about adding further language to clearly state that fact. If they are unwilling to do so, that will reveal the truth of their intentions, common sense will dictate the rest.

This arguement can apply to any limiting law. Guns, abortion, tv censoring, education laws, zoning laws, inheritance laws... None of these are iron-clad so that they cannot be ever changed, for better or worse.

They will not include such language because that would be needlessly wasteful of time and resources. Why turn a 100 page bill into a 200 page bill for the purpose of listing all exclusions and minute specifications? Why increase the work on a bill by 50%? To prevent the widescale and violent capture and imprisonment of the nations innocent citizens? What are the odds of needing to imprison large percentages of the population?

dreamgoddess11 4

Interesting. My thoughts..... Have you ever considered that our government simply wants to be prepared for a natural or other type of disaster for the American people? There are some good officials in our government (few) that do look at previous disasters after the fact and perform a review/evaluation. IE: what went wrong? what went well? What can we do better in the future? How do we implement this change? What resources are required..ect. That being said, makes sense to have them spread out

regionally. Afterall, It seems like they actually did a review after the Katrina disaster. Remember the folks spead out all over? In the dome ect..? They are simply trying to set up a system in case a scenario like that happens again...(& it will, matter of time).

Now let's say there is some conspiracy & Our Men in arms are ordered to perform heinous crimes..let me tell you, there is an unspoken Soldiers code the mass majority of military men follow thru-out the ranks. it's the right to disobey an UNLAWFUL order. I know our men & women in the services would rise up and take a stand against such things. They are human just like us, they have families too. Put your self in their shoes an ask your self, "what would I do?".

Edited December 12, 2011 by dreamgoddess11

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Omnaka 66

Omnaka

Member

66

7,045 posts

Gender:Male

Location:North West, U,S,A,

Forgive the Body and love the soul, For the soul is Gods Eternal child, your Brother.
O.

Interesting. My thoughts..... Have you ever considered that our government simply wants to be prepared for a natural or other type of disaster for the American people? There are some good officials in our government (few) that do look at previous disasters after the fact and perform a review/evaluation. IE: what went wrong? what went well? What can we do better in the future? How do we implement this change? What resources are required..ect. That being said, makes sense to have them spread out

regionally. Afterall, It seems like they actually did a review after the Katrina disaster. Remember the folks spead out all over? In the dome ect..? They are simply trying to set up a system in case a scenario like that happens again...(& it will, matter of time).

Now let's say there is some conspiracy & Our Men in arms are ordered to perform heinous crimes..let me tell you, there is an unspoken Soldiers code the mass majority of military men follow thru-out the ranks. it's the right to disobey an UNLAWFUL order. I know our men & women in the services would rise up and take a stand against such things. They are human just like us, they have families too. Put your self in their shoes an ask your self, "what would I do?".

Hopefully we have progressed since the civil war where it actually came down to fighting Brother against brother. and again, there is always some gung ho soldier who actually wants to kill people (Believe it or not) and or do it for a buck.

Love Omnaka

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Omnaka 66

Omnaka

Member

66

7,045 posts

Gender:Male

Location:North West, U,S,A,

Forgive the Body and love the soul, For the soul is Gods Eternal child, your Brother.
O.

Share on other sites

dreamgoddess11 4

Hopefully we have progressed since the civil war where it actually came down to fighting Brother against brother. and again, there is always some gung ho soldier who actually wants to kill people (Believe it or not) and or do it for a buck.

Love Omnaka

You didnt answer the question. What would you do?

I was a Soldier, My husband was, My father and every other male of age in my family.

Your perception of our military seems Distorted.

"gung ho" is not a term I would use to describe the "bad apples".

(which are everywhere...could be a neighbor not just Military)

Fact of the matter is, the majority rules here.

Our men & women have more LDRSHIP->

loyalty, duty, respect,selfless service, honor, integrity

& personal courage to do the right thing for our country

& our people than most citizens will ever truly witness or

Experience. Look at it from a different view,

honestly if you were in the service,

u were ordered to do something unlawful... What would u do?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

dreamgoddess11 4

Alien Embryo

Member

4

91 posts

Gender:Female

Location:New York

“Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
― John F. Kennedy

Share on other sites

dreamgoddess11 4

It "does not extend to", but "can it extend to", on a whim? I see no language that strongly prohibits that eventuality at all, that is what the chaos is about. If it truly "does not extend to" then they should have no qualms about adding further language to clearly state that fact. If they are unwilling to do so, that will reveal the truth of their intentions, common sense will dictate the rest.

Sorry, I can't be silent on this topic.

Federal regulations are always written in this way.

"does not" is not a "grey area phrase"

"does not" means exactly that.

There is no room for interpretation.

There is no need to put "will not".

It's the same thing.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Omnaka 66

Omnaka

Member

66

7,045 posts

Gender:Male

Location:North West, U,S,A,

Forgive the Body and love the soul, For the soul is Gods Eternal child, your Brother.
O.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Corp 1,420

Interesting. My thoughts..... Have you ever considered that our government simply wants to be prepared for a natural or other type of disaster for the American people? There are some good officials in our government (few) that do look at previous disasters after the fact and perform a review/evaluation. IE: what went wrong? what went well? What can we do better in the future? How do we implement this change? What resources are required..ect. That being said, makes sense to have them spread out

regionally. Afterall, It seems like they actually did a review after the Katrina disaster. Remember the folks spead out all over? In the dome ect..? They are simply trying to set up a system in case a scenario like that happens again...(& it will, matter of time).

Now let's say there is some conspiracy & Our Men in arms are ordered to perform heinous crimes..let me tell you, there is an unspoken Soldiers code the mass majority of military men follow thru-out the ranks. it's the right to disobey an UNLAWFUL order. I know our men & women in the services would rise up and take a stand against such things. They are human just like us, they have families too. Put your self in their shoes an ask your self, "what would I do?".

Hey hey hey! There will be no logical reasoning and general faith in mankind around here! Now get back to believing all government officials are evil and are planning to kill you!

Share on other sites

dreamgoddess11 4

Hey hey hey! There will be no logical reasoning and general faith in mankind around here! Now get back to believing all government officials are evil and are planning to kill you!

Oh! Whoops my bad I'll work on that.

It is so disheartening to read some folks thoughts on honest to goodness efforts to help us...not harm us. I believe there are "secrets" in any government. But this is just absolutely ridiculous. #1 the government would not even consider this, but if some "elite" person In the government were to bring this idea up; they would be laughed out of the room. #2 if this were to happen; "we the people" would take care of it.

That is all. I'm moving on. ;-) I may come back here if "whatsthere-face" ever decides to answer my "hypothetical" question.

Cheers:-)

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Fluffybunny 43

Forum Divinity

Member

43

14,049 posts

Gender:Male

"Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."
Thomas Paine

I was a Soldier, My husband was, My father and every other male of age in my family.

Your perception of our military seems Distorted.

"gung ho" is not a term I would use to describe the "bad apples".

(which are everywhere...could be a neighbor not just Military)

Fact of the matter is, the majority rules here.

Our men & women have more LDRSHIP->

loyalty, duty, respect,selfless service, honor, integrity

& personal courage to do the right thing for our country

& our people than most citizens will ever truly witness or

Experience. Look at it from a different view,

honestly if you were in the service,

u were ordered to do something unlawful... What would u do?

I would not do it, I was in the Army as well. I knew quite a few whom would have no problem killing , and or locking up americans under an order, and many more who aren't gung ho, who would follow orders first and ask questions later. Happy ?

PS- I have seen alot of abuses of power just being a civillion, I think the Majority of soldiers are good, and "some" of the police too. But I don't trust those in Government, especially those who are bought and paid for by banks and Corporations, which seems to be the rule nowadays instead of the exception. I hope you are right though.

Love , Omnaka

Edited December 14, 2011 by Omnaka

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Omnaka 66

Omnaka

Member

66

7,045 posts

Gender:Male

Location:North West, U,S,A,

Forgive the Body and love the soul, For the soul is Gods Eternal child, your Brother.
O.

Share on other sites

dreamgoddess11 4

I would not do it, I was in the Army as well. I knew quite a few whom would have no problem killing , and or locking up americans under an order, and many more who aren't gung ho, who would follow orders first and ask questions later. Happy ?

PS- I have seen alot of abuses of power just being a civillion, I think the Majority of soldiers are good, and "some" of the police too. But I don't trust those in Government, especially those who are bought and paid for by banks and Corporations, which seems to be the rule nowadays instead of the exception. I hope you are right though.

Love , Omnaka

Thank you for explaining better why you think what you do. I'm not trying to change your views. Just wanted to really know where u stand & why. sometimes people just have to "agree to disagree".

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

lightly 4,423

I'm sure there are contingency plans in place for "emergencies". Managing hoards of desperate people displaced and starving in the event of a serious economic collapse is undoubtedly one of those plans. There is an army reserve base abut 35 miles from here.. (which i have seen on the Fema Camp lists) .. it's nearly empty most of the time.. except it gets busy during summer army reserve and national guard training. It would be capable of housing and cooking for thousands.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Capt Amerika 628

"Uploaded by TheAlexJonesChannel" says about all you need to know, I think.

How many times has "The Govt." supposedly been about to round up the People and intern them/exterminate them? Wasn't 9/11 supposed to be the excuse that would give the Bush Administration the excuse to do it?

Ask the Japanese during WW2 how it felt.

Hard to say the Govt. wont do something when they have already done the very same thing in the past.